Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 864 posts

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#171

Post by thepasswordis »

helf wrote: post #33
thepasswordis wrote: post #21

It seems like there is a huge disconnect between people who know about FSD from using it and people who know about FSD from things they read on the internet. I have FSD, I use it every single day. I love it. If every car on the road had this the road would be a substantially safer place.

Until your car decides to randomly slam on its brakes and cause a pile up.

If my car slams on its brakes, and this causes you to hit me, then you are exactly the type of person I wish was using FSD.

You're following too close to me for the conditions, you're distracted, or some combination of both.

My car might have to emergency brake for any number of reasons. This should never cause a pileup, and if it does it's your fault, not mine.

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#173

Post by ok123456 »

lolinder wrote: post #122
rootusrootus wrote: post #50

Meanwhile, the only actual L3 capable car is a Mercedes. Plenty of people will argue that AP is actually superior, but I don't think there's any way to say that for sure, given the tight constraints Mercedes has put on their driver assistance in order to lower the liability enough to make L3 not a bankruptcy event. For certain, however, they are more confident in their technology than Tesla is, otherwise Tesla would…

> To be fair, though, Tesla has no sensors other than cameras, and I believe the Mercedes has a half dozen or so, several radars and even a lidar. This doesn't mitigate Tesla's gross ethical violations in letting this thing loose, it makes them worse. Tesla knew that cameras alone would be harder to make work than cameras plus radar plus lidar, and they shouldn't be lauded for attempting FSD with just cameras. It's a…

Remember that big announcement musk did where he stated, that going forward, Teslas would not use any additional sensors to aid the video---to the point of laughing at every other company that was still using them. Yeah.

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#174

Post by natch »

diebeforei485 wrote: post #135
jonny_eh wrote: post #2

Does a recall like this actually mean owners return their car to Tesla for modification? Or would it be an over-the-air update to remove FSD?

Why does the media not make this clear in the headline?

Because Tesla does not pay for advertising in media outlets. So many media outlets tend to have it in for Tesla.

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#175

Post by dreamcompiler »

varjag wrote: post #84
apnew wrote: post #64

> The FSD Beta system may cause crashes by allowing the affected vehicles to: “act unsafe around intersections, such as traveling straight through an intersection while in a turn-only lane, entering a stop sign-controlled intersection without coming to a complete stop, or proceeding into an intersection during a steady yellow traffic signal without due caution,” according to the notice on the website of the National…

That's the thing about neural networks: any QA is going to be superficial due to their statistical black box nature.

Exactly. It's the same reason that no amount of unit tests can replace formal methods for safety-critical software, and we cannot apply formal methods to neural nets [yet].

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#176

Post by buildbot »

jlv2 wrote: post #154

There really needs to be a distinction between an actual recall (my Model S had one to change the latch on the frunk) and this type of "recall" that is nothing more than an OTA software update.

Why? It involves a safety system! That needs to be tracked publicly and updated! Nothing more than an OTA - does not mean much when everything is fly by wire and a bug could mean your car does not stop accelerating or something.

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#177

Post by pavlov »

james_pm wrote: post #147
idlewords wrote: post #141

I love that this is the same guy who wants to send people to Mars one-way and then figure out the return trip later.

No need to worry about the return trip if it's unlikely that anyone would survive the trip there, right?

”Six days after the radiation-wrecked colonists emerged from the battered Starship, the Emperor of Mars condemned them all to death by suffocation for ‘insufficiently engaging with his tweets’. Historians debate the meaning of this expression found carved in a rock outside the base.”

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#178

Post by belter »

jlv2 wrote: post #154

There really needs to be a distinction between an actual recall (my Model S had one to change the latch on the frunk) and this type of "recall" that is nothing more than an OTA software update.

One can kill people the other not. Guess which one.

>> "...The FSD Beta system may cause crashes by allowing the affected vehicles to: “Act unsafe around intersections, such as traveling straight through an intersection while in a turn-only lane, entering a stop sign-controlled intersection without coming to a complete stop, or proceeding into an intersection during a steady yellow traffic signal without due caution,” according to the notice on the website of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration..."

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#180

Post by yabones »

jlv2 wrote: post #154

There really needs to be a distinction between an actual recall (my Model S had one to change the latch on the frunk) and this type of "recall" that is nothing more than an OTA software update.

It's nice that they can quickly fix it without people needing to drive to a service center, but you can understand that people would be concerned by the "may cause crashes" part?
Post reply on HN